FRIDAY, OCTOBER 25, 2024
The candidate sounds off: In a move that has deeply surprised the experts, Candidate Donald J. Trump has sounded off again.
For Alex Griffing's report at Mediaite, you can just click here. Meanwhile, gaze on his works and despair:
Donald J. Trump: Truth Social, 4/25/24
CEASE & DESIST: I, together with many Attorneys and Legal Scholars, am watching the Sanctity of the 2024 Presidential Election very closely because I know, better than most, the rampant Cheating and Skullduggery that has taken place by the Democrats in the 2020 Presidential Election. It was a Disgrace to our Nation! Therefore, the 2024 Election, where Votes have just started being cast, will be under the closest professional scrutiny and, WHEN I WIN, those people that CHEATED will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the Law, which will include long term prison sentences so that this Depravity of Justice does not happen again. We cannot let our Country further devolve into a Third World Nation, AND WE WON’T! Please beware that this legal exposure extends to Lawyers, Political Operatives, Donors, Illegal Voters, & Corrupt Election Officials. Those involved in unscrupulous behavior will be sought out, caught, and prosecuted at levels, unfortunately, never seen before in our Country.
At Mediaite, Griffing also links to a new report about this nutcase from Tuesday's Morning Edition.
NPR's Tom Dreisbach was interviewed by Leila Fadel about an investigation he conducted. Headline included, the summary reads like this:
Trump makes more than 100 threats to prosecute or punish perceived enemies
With just two weeks until Election Day, former President Donald Trump has been escalating his attacks on his political rivals and what he calls, quote, "the enemy within," unquote.
Now an NPR investigation has found that Trump has made more than a hundred threats to investigate, prosecute, jail or otherwise punish his perceived opponents, including private citizens.
At this point, someone else will have to fact-check Dreisbach's voluminous work. That said, the candidate's latest post at the ironically named Truth Social site pretty much speaks for itself.
Is something wrong what Candidate Trump? Is he some type of nutcase?
At this site, we stated our basic view long ago. Last night, to our surprise, The PBS News Hour took an extremely tiny first step with respect to an attempt to come to terms with that widely disappeared question.
Is something wrong with Candidate Trump? At this site, we've long assumed that he suffers from some diagnosable form of "mental illness." The mainstream press corps has fought to the end for the right to disappear any such thoughts from a great nation's spotless minds.
Last night, the News Hour devoted nine minutes to a segment hosted by Amna Nawaz. The segment in question started like this, transcript headline included:
Trump’s rambling speeches raise questions about mental decline
NAWAZ: If he is reelected, former President Donald Trump, now 78 years old, would be the oldest president ever elected. After a number of appearances where his remarks were rambling or incoherent, and one event in which he swayed silently to music on stage for close to 40 minutes, questions are being raised about possible cognitive decline.
For the record, this segment dealt with possible "cognitive decline," not with possible mental illness. No PBS viewer would have to hear about (former) Yale psychiatrist Bandy X. Lee, or about the 37 medical specialists who contributed essays to her best-selling 2017 book, The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump.
Dr. Lee's book has been almost wholly disappeared by our nation's major news orgs. At present, the candidate seems to be getting worse, as Dr. Lee predicted.
The News Hour wasn't willing to take things quite that far last night. Here's the way Nawaz introduced her principal guest:
NAWAZ: Mr. Trump has dismissed any speculation about mental decline, describing his rambling rhetoric as him weaving together different topics and saying his supporters get it.
Let's take a look at some of these questions with an author and clinical psychologist who's raised some of them. That's Dr. Ben Michaelis.
Doctor, welcome to the News Hour. Thanks for joining us.
The discussion continued from there. The clinical psychologist was asked about possible cognitive issues, not about any possible "personality disorders." In theory, there will be plenty of time to talk about that once the again-elected President Trump has dismantled the world.
(You can see the News Hour's transcript, or the videotape of the segment, at the proffered link.
Everyone in the guild agreed—it mustn't be discussed. Last evening, the News Hour took a tiny first step.
Today, he sounded off.
One last point: The New York Times has never managed to find a way to build a recognizable front-page "news hook" around this endless disordered behavior.
In fairness, there has never been any such candidate in modern presidential elections. For that reason, there is no pre-existing journalistic formula for handling disorder on this remarkable scale.
In fairness, it wasn't just the New York Times. More on this journalistic failure to come.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWaPo today:
ReplyDeleteHow Trump talks: Abrupt shifts, profane insults, confusing sentences
The wisdom of Sesame Street: "One of these things is not like the other."
ReplyDeleteTrump "threatened to investigate, prosecute, jail or otherwise punish" opponents. Investigation is not threat. It's appropriate when there is possible wrongdoing.
He already seems to know what the result of those "appropriate" investigations will be:
DeleteWHEN I WIN, those people that CHEATED will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the Law, which will include long term prison sentences
Quaker -- Trump speaks so loosely that it's impossible to know what he meant. But, if we take his actual words, he didn't say he'd punish all his opponents. Only those who "cheated". Also, he said "to the full extent of the law, so he's only talking about the subset of opponents who broke the law.
DeleteNone of the people he's threatening have cheated or have been shown to have broken the law, you dumb fuck. So you're just going to keep on defending this fucking lunatic, no matter how obviously unfit he is?
DeleteLEILA FADEL, HOST: With just two weeks until Election Day, former President Donald Trump has been escalating his attacks on his political rivals and what he calls, quote, "the enemy within," unquote.
A MARTÍNEZ, HOST: Now an NPR investigation has found that Trump has made more than a hundred threats to investigate, prosecute, jail or otherwise punish his perceived opponents, including private citizens.
FADEL: NPR's investigative correspondent, Tom Dreisbach, has been looking into this. Good morning.
TOM DREISBACH, BYLINE: Good morning.
FADEL: So we know former President Trump has talked about, quote, "locking people up" for a long time. What's new about what you found here?
DREISBACH: Right. And, you know, Trump's allies say, come on. This is just campaign rhetoric. The media is overhyping this. So we wanted to find out - just how often does Trump do this? And we looked at rally speeches, interviews, social media posts just since 2022, when he was preparing for this campaign. And that's how we found more than 100 examples.
FADEL: More than a hundred examples - who exactly is he targeting?
DREISBACH: Well, at the top of the list are his political opponents. He says if he wins, on Day 1, he will appoint a special prosecutor to investigate President Joe Biden and Biden's family. He says Vice President Kamala Harris should be prosecuted. He's reposted calls for former President Barack Obama, former Congresswoman Liz Cheney to face military tribunals. And then he's also pushed for prosecutions and arrests of people involved in the criminal and civil cases against him - prosecutors, judges, even a courthouse staffer. And in one case, he floated the idea of prosecuting a member of the Georgia grand jury that indicted him for election interference.
FADEL: OK, so this goes well beyond just politicians, including private citizens, like this juror you just described, but also journalists. What has Trump said about them?
DREISBACH: Well, he said journalists who refuse to give up their sources should go to jail. He says CBS and NBC should be investigated and lose their broadcast licenses because he didn't like their news coverage. He's also attacked people who criticize or protest the Supreme Court. This is from a rally this September.
(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)
DONALD TRUMP: These people should be put in jail. The way they talk about our judges and our justices, trying to get them to sway their vote.
FADEL: I mean, what you're describing, Tom, is pretty frightening. And all of this obviously raises the question - could former President Trump actually do this?
DREISBACH: Well, there's been a norm that's generally accepted for decades that the White House does not direct investigations by the Justice Department, but it is not the law. And at the end of the day, the president does control the Justice Department. Of course, there are guardrails. Judges can refuse to sign warrants. They can dismiss charges. But investigations alone, legal experts told me, can be terrifying - cost a ton of money in legal bills. And there's this concern that just the threat of a prosecution can make someone say, if opposing the president gets me investigated, is it really worth the risk?
DeleteFADEL: So a chilling effect there. What does your reporting tell you about whether Trump would actually take action on these threats?
DREISBACH: Yeah, an analysis from an NYU law professor found a dozen cases from Trump's first term where he pressured the Justice Department to investigate, and they did follow through. And I also talked to multiple people who said they're preparing for the worst case in case Trump wins. Stephanie Grisham was a press secretary in Trump's White House, but she now says he's unfit for office.
STEPHANIE GRISHAM: I just know that once he's in office, with no reason to worry about reelection and only the most fervent, loyal people surrounding him, that he will absolutely make sure his enemies pay for what he perceives to be their crimes.
DREISBACH: And Grisham told me she's already saving money, getting ducks in a row in case she's subjected to, say, an investigation or IRS audit. Meanwhile, a spokesperson for the Republican Party responded to our reporting by saying that Harris is the threat to democracy.
Trump said that if Jesus were the vote counter, he would have won CA in 2020. That means that he thinks 5 million people (the margin Trump lost the state by to Biden) cheated. Is that a subset? Trump's obvious reasoning is that if voters hadn't cheated, he would have won, therefore they must have cheated because he lost the state.
Delete"Investigation is not threat. It's appropriate when there is possible wrongdoing."
DeleteWhat is this supposed to mean? That only guilty people are investigated? That defending yourself against a DOJ investigation is a piece of cake?
Is there a choherent thought buried in here somewhere?
Investigation is a way to harrass a political opponent, as occurred with the many Benghazi investigations of Hillary Clinton, which never found any wrongdoing but took up a lot of time and money and resulted in unfair negative headlines in the news.
DeleteInvestigation is a way to harass a political opponent, as occurred with the Russia/Trump collusion investigations which never found any wrongdoing but took up a gigantic amount of time and money and resulted in years of toweringly unfair and false negative headlines in the news.
DeleteRe. his threat of investigations - Trump is definitely going to win the election. It's just by how much. I hope people are ready for it.
"Trump is definitely going to win the election."
DeleteYeah, man. I'll take that to the bank. An anonymous commenter's prediction on the election. The inside scoop.
I just hope you're going to be able to deal with it. It may be a landslide.
DeleteThe investigation into Russian election interference and possible collusion between the Putin regime and the Trump campaign was not political harassment. It had overwhelming circumstantial evidence to support it, and it would have been a complete abdication of duty to just ignore such evidence, given the national security risk involved. And Democrats were not in control of the Justice Department at the time, so to compare that investigation to the kind of threats Trump is making is "both sides-ism" taken to stupid new heights.
Delete"I just hope you're going to be able to deal with it." Sure you do.
DeleteI do hope you're going to be able to deal with it. You bear partial responsibility for it. You have to live with your actions. You encouraged it. You brought it on.
Deleteif i'm responsible for trump, i guess you are too, since you've "both sides"-d everything to death and trashed dems more than repubs, often with baseless smears. you still helping trump by voting for Stein?
Delete"I just hope you're going to be able to deal with it. It may be a landslide"
DeleteMonkeys may fly out of your butt, too.
You became addicted to gaslighting and lying about political realities. And you became addicted to gaslighting and lying to people who were simply being honest about them. And you cost Democrats the election by doing so. Next time, try being honest and real.
DeleteEg. Russiagate had "overwhelming circumstantial evidence to support it". This is the kind of gaslighting and lying, that you engaged in every day for years.
4:11, do you know what "gaslighting" means, jackass?
Delete"You really need a cognitive checkup" is a classic example of gaslighting.
Delete"Are you okay?" is gaslighting.
Saying Biden lost the first debate because he was "over prepared" is gaslighting.
Somerby called it "insistence on denial" and "shouting down".
"We at this site have tried to describe the universe within which Blue America's insistence on denial has been operating in the course of the past year."
'It's a miraculous economy but Americans don't feel it because they are stupid', 'Ukraine is winning the war against Russia', 'Hunter's laptop is Russian disinformation', 'Panic over Joe Biden's age is manufactured' was all gaslighting. You became addicted to gaslighting and "insistence on denial" about political realities and it cost the Democrats the White House. It might have been the ruin of the party. If it turns out to be a landslide, there won't be a Democratic Party in 10 years. And you are partially responsible.
Harris has a week to turn things around. And if she does lose, it's her fault and Biden's fault.
Delete10:45,
DeleteThe only people who can't be blamed if Trump wins the Presidential election are Republican voters.
That would be like blaming a baby for shitting in their diaper.
Talk about gaslighting. Nearly every one of those "paraphrases" is an exaggeration. No one of any influence on the Democratic side said "Ukraine is winning," for example. The only statement that's not a distortion is the actual quote about "overwhelming circumstantial evidence to support [the Mueller investigation]," which is perfectly accurate. Do you HONESTLY think there shouldn't have been an investigation, given everything that was known at the time? You're the one who is lying about political realities in this case. And aren't you the one who consistently uses "straw man" claims (i.e., lies) on here? Aren't you the one who rushed to repeat the right-wing propaganda about Harris being an alcoholic, despite having no evidence? And you're going to lecture others about dishonestly? Fuck you. Go vote for Stein and enjoy the results of your efforts.
DeleteSpeaking of gas-lighting. Can you imagine being so gullible you'd believe Republican voters, who know ZERO about economics, are "economically anxious"?
DeleteLet's face it. Some people deserve to be ripped off by three-time GOP Presidential nominee, Treason McRapey.
Most Republican voters are upper income people with few economic worries.
DeleteJesus is a gardener, he’s supposed to come by once a week but he only comes by when he wants to, he would not produce a reliable vote count. He does do a good job at gardening.
Trump did collude with Russia and did obstruct the investigation, Mueller published two entire volumes detailing the evidence his tepid investigation found. Mueller self imposed silly criteria for technical “collusion”, because he was a Republican investigating Republicans, he was never going to go all in with a full throated effort.
Since Mueller, there’s been a steady drip of uncovering Russians meddling in our electoral process, always in collusion with Republicans. But the Biden’s admin DOJ isn’t playing, and Putin is busy getting his ass kicked and handing over the keys to China, so the meddling isn’t as impactful as 2016. To be fair, Putin has strengthened NATO and exposed Russia as a weak, paper tiger, so much obliged Putin, nice going!
The only gaslighting on this subject is when pathetic trolls cry about a Russian hoax.
Harris has maintained a lead in the polls since August, early turnout is high, as well as voter registration among women and young people, all which favors Harris. Harris will easily win, and we can all sit back and relax as Trump faces personal responsibility for his corruption and criminality.
Mike:
DeleteSmall correction: Leon Panetta said "Ukraine is winning". He's about as influential as it gets.
But I believe the commenter was talking about those statements being made here in the comment section, which they pretty much were.
" ... it wasn't just the New York Times."
ReplyDeleteThen there's the LA Times and the Washington Post and their lack of intestinal fortitude.
Regardless of whether there is something wrong with Trump, there is something wrong with Trump supporters and with the many people besides the press who do not stand up and oppose Trump when he engages in his crimes and scams.
ReplyDeleteSomerby has never raised the issue of what is wrong with Trump supporters. He wants to limit discussion to the news media that he dislikes, that he seems to have a preexisting beef with. Somerby has never said "What's wrong with Mitch McConnell?" Somerby has never said "What's wrong with Mike Johnson?" Somerby has never said "What's wrong with Melania Trump or Ivanka or Jared or Don Jr. or Eric or Tiffany?" Somerby has never said what is wrong with all those people who stormed the Capitol and the ones who voted for Trump in 2020 (never mind 2016, when they might have been confused).
Somerby has asked why psychologists and psychiatrists do not violate their own ethical standards to remotely diagnose Trump (there is no evidence Somerby listened to the answer), but Somerby has never asked why Trump's cabinet did not use Amendment 25 or why none of Trump's closest advisors and staff have not insisted that he release his health records.
Somerby does not seem serious about his wailing about Trump's obvious deficiencies when he has never taken this past the stage where he gets to call Morning Joe names. He asks what's wrong with Gutfeld that he tells crude jokes, but he has never asked what is wrong with Gutfeld that he supports Trump.
I want to know why not. I want to know why Somerby, who is willing to chastise liberals all day long, has never had the nerve to chastise all those millions of Trump supporters, who all clearly know that Trump is not right but support him anyway.
Liz Cheney and various other Republicans have had the courage to take that step. Somerby has never applauded them or even noticed their efforts. Some of them have destroyed their political careers in order to oppose Trump. That is political and person courage. Somerby has never asked why so few others have cared enough about our country to sacrifice to keep us safe from a monster like Trump. Why not? Does Somerby lack the political courage to ask these obvious questions? Apparently so.
Somerby is asking the wrong question. I agree with Jeff Teidrich:
ReplyDeleteTucker Carlson said: “there has to be a point at which dad comes home. dad comes home and he’s pissed. he’s not vengeful, he loves his children. disobedient as they may be, he loves them … and when dad gets home, you know what he says? you’ve been a bad girl. you’ve been a bad little girl and you’re getting a vigorous spanking right now. and no, it’s not going to hurt me more than it hurts you. no, it’s not. I’m not going to lie. it’s going to hurt you a lot more than it hurts me. and you earned this. you’re getting a vigorous spanking because you’ve been a bad girl, and it has to be this way.”
that was Tuckums, two nights ago at a hate-rally in Duluth, Georgia, warming up the crowd for Donny Convict.
now, I can hear you saying, please, Uncle Jeff — tell us what happened next. please tell us that the crowd sat in confused silence. that you could hear a pin drop, and then a voice rang out as clear as a bell:
“what the fuck is wrong with you?”
sorry, no. that ain’t how that shit went down. Donny’s deranged cultists gobbled it up.
Clearly this struck a chord with the crowd. Later, when Trump came on stage, they screamed “Daddy’s home” and “Daddy Don.” Sigmund Freud almost rose from his grave.
no one could have predicted that the cultists who prance about in adult diapers — worn outside their clothing — would be totally up for a vigorous spanking from Dear Leader.
and they wonder why we call them weird as fuck.
what the hell did these people’s parents do to them?"
That is the question Somerby should be asking about Trump's followers. Because if Trump has a heinous personality disorder, so do the Republicans who support him. But Somerby won't ever say that. Why? It is as obvious as Trump's own pathology.
Is Somerby wrong with Somerby if he ignores and NEVER discusses the sexual assault accusations against Trump?
ReplyDeleteNoah Berlatsky at Public Notice says:
"Yet another woman has accused Donald Trump of sexually assaulting her. On a Zoom call for Survivors for Kamala, former model Stacey Williams, 56, said that Trump groped her at a party while billionaire sex trafficker and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein stood by.
Trump has been accused of sexual misconduct by at least eighteen women. Last year a jury found him liable for the sexual assault of writer E. Jean Carroll. The judge in the case characterized the the assault as a rape.
Everybody who wants to know, then, already knows that Trump has a history of sexually harassing and abusing women. Nonetheless, polls show him with about a 50 percent chance of winning the election.
It’s easy to be cynical about the possible effect of new accusations. Trump’s fans don’t care that he’s an abuser. If new revelations were going to affect the election, they would have already done so, the argument goes. Nothing matters.
The problem with the immediate assertion that something won’t matter, though, is that it can easily become a self-fulfilling prophecy. It gives the media an excuse to dismiss and ignore Trump’s scandals and Trump’s vileness. And in this case, it’s also insulting to survivors, who put themselves at substantial risk when they come forward to defy one of the most powerful men in the world.
Rather than insisting preemptively that testimony about Trump’s unfitness doesn’t matter, we need to take it seriously — and insist that the media and voters take it seriously too."
I agree with Berlatsky that we need to keep reminding the public about these accusations, whether the press seems uninterested or not. That includes Somerby, who tends to blame sexual assault on the victim (judging by his discussion of Chanel Miller's rape case). There are so many women with similar assault complaints that it is hard to believe they all lack substance, yet this election has pretended they don't exist. Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell were both convicted of sex trafficking. Trump is an adjudged sexual abuser who libeled his victim, E.Jean Carroll. The many other women have not had a day in court (besides Stormy Daniels). Why won't Somerby and the press take seriously these accusations which show that Trump (in his own words on the Pussy tape) has no respect for women, who are 50% of a president's constituents. Trump is unfit because of his lack of character, even if he is now 78 and too old to abuse anyone convincingly. He doesn't deserve to run, much less win.
Why doesn't Somerby say any of this?
https://www.publicnotice.co/p/stacey-williams-trump-epstein-allegation
Typo correction: Is something wrong with Somerby, in the first sentence.
DeleteFrom Andy Borowitz (spoiler: humor)
ReplyDelete"PITTSBURGH (The Borowitz Report)—Deepening his engagement with American democracy, on Friday the Tesla CEO Elon Musk offered a million dollars to anyone willing to forfeit their human rights.
“Giving up your rights is like riding in a driverless car,” he told a Republican rally audience. “Before you know it, you won’t miss having any control.”
“Just sign over your voting, civil, and reproductive rights and the check is yours!” he yelled.
Sweetening the deal, Musk also offered a million dollars to anyone who can stand hearing him talk for four minutes."
The political bias and dishonest of the left is something to behold. When Musk was the big electric car maven and voted Democrat, he was a hero. Now that he's supporting Trump he's the devil. He deserves to be mocked by Borowitz. His companies are being investigated by various federal agencies.
DeleteMusk was never a hero to liberals, David. That’s just your fantasy. But he’s out there every day insulting liberals, probably heretofore the main consumers of his cars. Smart.
Delete7:40,
DeleteYou really need a cognitive checkup. Sure, a lot of people on the left are biased against Trump and his supporters. Okay, great point.
But there's nothing remotely dishonest in the scenario you sketched out. Are you okay?
David in Cal,
DeleteYou're doing it wrong. FIRST, you call the Left "snowflakes", THEN you whine and cry about black people getting to vote in elections.
Don't just take my word for it. Check the handbook. It's right there.
"Black Insurrectionist," the X poster who promoted the so-called affidavit showing collusion between CBS and the Harris campaign in advance of her 60 Minutes interview has been identified.
ReplyDeleteDiC? I believe you wrote that this would be damning "if true." It is not true. "Black Insurrectionist" is in fact white, a tax cheat, and a fraud.
Sorry. ABC debate, not CBS and 60 Minutes.
DeleteNothing will get through to DiC.
Delete
ReplyDeleteWhat's so "nutcase" about prosecuting people that CHEATED to the fullest extent of the Law?
So, the Democrat party is into rewarding people that CHEATED? It doesn't surprise me at all.
Nothing will top the Right whining and crying like two-year olds because refugees heard them respond to BLM with "All Lives Matter" , and thought they were being serious.
DeleteIf you aren't pointing and laughing at the Right for that, you need to get your sense of humor checked. That will NEVER stop being funny.
There's no word-salad yummier than a Democrat word-salad.
DeleteTrump isn’t just threatening cheaters, 8:44.
Delete10:54,
DeleteIt's hilarious. I love to remind them of that own-goal every chance I get.
If you say so, Sir, Mr. Soros.
Delete11:36,
DeleteIt's funny, because Republican voters are trying to elect a rapist to be the President of the United States. Again.
Of course, Mr. Soros. Very funny, ha-ha-ha.
DeleteWe all love you, Mr. Soros.
You’re a riot, 11:50, aka mr musk, ms adelman, mr Thiel. Is 94-year-old Soros all you got?
DeleteCorrection: Adelson.
DeleteEvidently Bob is unaware that there's a rational motive for Trump's threats to prosecute election cheaters. It isn't complicated. Trump's threat is designed to deter election cheating against his campaign.
ReplyDeleteTrump did a great service to the country in 2020 by making those threats.
DeleteIt's probably THE main reason there was no cheating in the 2020 Presidential election.
Unfortunately, it also led to a bunch of Right-wing snowflakes throwing a childish temper tantrum at the United States Capitol, just because black people's votes were counted in that election.
David,
DeleteRemember that time Right-wing snowflakes threw a childish temper tantrum at the United States Capitol, just because black people's votes were counted in that election?
Asking, because I will never forget (and am here to always remind) Right-wing snowflakes that they threw a childish temper tantrum at the United States Capitol, just because black people's votes were counted in that election.
Congratulations @11:14 for noticing that Jan 6 was not a revolution.
DeleteNobody called it a revolution, Dickhead. You are perfectly comfortable with handing power back to the man who tried to steal the last election. Go fuck yourself.
Delete12:17,
DeleteThanks.
It's not like it's the first time I noticed the Right were a bunch of snowflakes.
Remember, these crybabies are afraid of drag queens, ferchrissakes.
David in Cal,
DeleteSay what you will about Right-wingers throwing a childish temper tantrum at the United States Capitol for no other reason then black people's votes were counted in the 2020 Presidential election, but you can't say it isn't 100% on brand.
David in Cal,
DeleteJanuary 6th was an attempted revolution.
Sure, it was lame, but what do you expect from a bunch of lazy, white, ignorant bigots cosplaying as patriots? My 6-year old niece's soccer team is tougher (and smarter) than those creampuffs.
The best thing about Donald Trump is his open disdain for Republican voters. If he wins the election, he should make that mandatory by Executive fiat.
ReplyDeleteSounds fair. The Supreme Court will allow it. Who could argue he'd be doing it for any other reason than to save the Republic?
DeleteBret Stephens has decided to vote for Kamala Harris. Does anyone care?
ReplyDeleteDid Kamala err by declining to appear with Joe Rogan? I don't know how that would have worked, but IMO Trump's appearance with Rogan was very effective. The main benefit to Trump is that he came across as a reasonable human being.
ReplyDeleteI think Kamala would have not performed well had she done that show.
DeleteNo DIC, he still comes across as a narcissistic asshole fascist. What's not to love about the nasty POS?
DeleteYes. But don't tell his supporters, there is something wrong with them as well.
ReplyDeleteCryptocurrency prices have suddenly surged. People ask if now is the best time to invest? before jumping into conclusion i think you should take a look at things first. BTC price is gearing for a massive move upwards, even though the crypto market has been recording many downturns this 2024, the instrument seems to hold its ground. Investors who bought early are still in profit despite the recent price crash and they also earn by trading. There has been a lot of interest in BTC trading, many investors and newbies are actively engaging in the trade on platforms where they can accumulate more profit. We should follow the way of earning more regardless of the current market (bulls or bears), which is trading. Buy the dip now and trade, I have been able to recover all my lost crypto/funds and made $10,000-$20,000 profits not just by buying the dip but implementing trades with signals supplied by my broker Mr Bernie Doran, his trading signals and strategies are 100% accurate . He can be reached on Gmail : Berniedoransignals@gmail.com or WhatsApp : +1(424)285-0682
ReplyDelete